Some Democrats open to Bush plan

January 4, 2007|By Jeff Zeleny The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Some key Senate Democrats say they could consider supporting a short-term increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq, a stance that reflects division within the party and could provide an opening for President Bush as he prepares to announce his revised plan for Iraq as early as next week.

Bush is expected to outline a strategy that would include adding to U.S. forces but would link that increase to a plan for economic development in Iraq. He has vowed to consult congressional leaders before delivering his speech to the nation, and he began that process on Wednesday night by inviting House and Senate leaders to a White House reception, though officials said Iraq was not discussed.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who will lead the Armed Services Committee, said he would not "prejudge" the president's proposal. While he would oppose an open-ended commitment, Levin said, he would not rule out supporting a plan to dispatch more troops if the proposal was tied to a broader strategy to begin reducing U.S. involvement and sending troops home.

"The American people are skeptical about getting in deeper," he said. "But if it's truly conditional upon the Iraqis actually meeting milestones and if it's part of an overall program of troop reduction that would begin in the next four to six months, it's something that would be worth considering."

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del., who will become chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, has said he is opposed to increasing troop strength regardless of the plan, calling the idea the "absolute wrong strategy."

Several Democratic senators on Wednesday echoed Biden's view, saying they think sending more troops would not resolve the predicament in Iraq.

Democrats have become well-practiced at playing the roles of critic and skeptic, particularly when the subject is the war in Iraq. But as the party formally assumes control of Congress today, the divisions between the committee leaders, party leadership and rank-and-file senators illustrate the fresh burden they face of articulating a response to Bush's revised Iraq strategy.

Democrats may find it difficult to speak with one voice in response to Bush's plan. And at this point, party strategists said, they do not necessarily intend to. Over the next three weeks, Senate Democrats plan to call at least 13 hearings on Iraq, to be held by committees that include Foreign Relations, Armed Services, Intelligence, Homeland Security and Judiciary.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have agreed to testify, officials said, and invitations were sent this week to former administration officials, academics and military and Iraqi experts.

Short of reducing military financing, which even the staunchest congressional war critics have been reluctant to do, Democrats say they think one of the most effective tools they have to influence policy is to hold televised hearings.

"What you are going to find is that this is no longer exclusively a Democratic criticism," said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a member of the Armed Services Committee. "A lot of Republicans are going to be standing up and saying, `I don't understand what the president's strategy is.' A lot of people will be asking serious questions and that will be healthy."

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., who also serves on the Armed Services Committee, said a troop increase "might lead to a temporary abatement to the violence, but will only postpone the ultimate day of reckoning."

Bayh added, "This problem is not going to be solved in Washington by the president of the United States; it can only be resolved by Iraqis."

In a memorandum sent Wednesday to members of the Democratic caucus, Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the incoming majority leader, pledged that "Democrats will work with Republicans to bring oversight and accountability" to the war.

Reid has said that he will consider supporting a short-term increase in troops, but his spokesman, Jim Manley, declared, "If it's not temporary in nature, it's a nonstarter."

On the issue of sending more troops to Iraq, the White House is also reaching out to Senate Democrats who are facing re-election in 2008.

"I am not in favor of that unless the president can convince me otherwise," Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who will serve on the Armed Services Committee, said of a possible troop increase.

"I think that the Congress, after 9-11, was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on a whole range of issues related to Iraq," Pryor said, "but we've been there four years now and it's time for him to clearly have the burden of proof."